[deleted]
The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion
11–20 of 31 posts
Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion
#12For those curious, they're using a Dymaxion map, also known as the Fuller projection[1]. It's named for Buckminster Fuller, and the goal is to reduce skew of shape and size. Notice, for example, the sizes of Greenland and Africa as compared to their heavily-skewed sizes on the Mercator projection. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dymaxion_map
I assume they think this is a good choice, but I disagree. It's just confusing. Why add such friction to data display?
Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion
#13This is, arguably, good news. Though I lament the rise of the people who centre their identity around their lack of religion and go on the offensive against believers. They're not much better than the religious. Religion is not the source of all evil.
I think they are mainly found in areas where being atheist is still "edgy". With the decline of organised religion, those people will probably go away on their own.
Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion
#14For those curious, they're using a Dymaxion map, also known as the Fuller projection[1]. It's named for Buckminster Fuller, and the goal is to reduce skew of shape and size. Notice, for example, the sizes of Greenland and Africa as compared to their heavily-skewed sizes on the Mercator projection. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dymaxion_map
I wanted to comment on that as well. Very cool to see. I really hope the Fuller projection goes mainstream.
"Fuller argued that in the universe there is no "up" and "down", or "north" and "south": only "in" and "out". Gravitational forces of the stars and planets created "in", meaning "towards the gravitational center", and "out", meaning "away from the gravitational center". He attributed the north-up-superior/south-down-inferior presentation of most other world maps to cultural bias.
"Fuller intended the map to be unfolded in different ways to emphasize different aspects of the world. Peeling the triangular faces of the icosahedron apart in one way results in an icosahedral net that shows an almost contiguous land mass comprising all of Earth's continents – not groups of continents divided by oceans. Peeling the solid apart in a different way presents a view of the world dominated by connected oceans surrounded by land.
"Showing the continents as "one island earth" also helped Fuller explain, in his book Critical Path, the journeys of early seafaring people, who were in effect using prevailing winds to circumnavigate this world island."
Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion
#15This is, arguably, good news. Though I lament the rise of the people who centre their identity around their lack of religion and go on the offensive against believers. They're not much better than the religious. Religion is not the source of all evil.
Although I sympathies with your first point this claim "Religion is not the source of all evil" really dims down the evil.
Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion
#16This is, arguably, good news. Though I lament the rise of the people who centre their identity around their lack of religion and go on the offensive against believers. They're not much better than the religious. Religion is not the source of all evil.
In light of the rise of political christianity, the rise of militant atheism is both expected and culturally justified.
I don't think so. I prefer people simply not identify. I don't prefer associating with other atheists just because they are other atheists. I rather loathe proselytizing evangelizing atheists they irk me as much as the young adults in white shirts black slacks and black ties.
Now, I welcome an ebb in Christianity and Islam. As well as the expansion of atheism, I just prefer soft atheism over the more Religious-like atheism. It's antithetical to being an atheist.
Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion
#17This is, arguably, good news. Though I lament the rise of the people who centre their identity around their lack of religion and go on the offensive against believers. They're not much better than the religious. Religion is not the source of all evil.
In light of the rise of political christianity, the rise of militant atheism is both expected and culturally justified.
I consider my protests and vocal opposition to christianity being enforced on my family from my family, and my vocal opposition to its ongoing role in politics as a defensive tactic.
I am often labeled as being on the offensive, and it'd be nice to talk about this line more (when is it offense, when is it defense).
Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those people are just annoying. The most extreme religious people can be actively harmful to society/their children.
That's not a property exclusive to the religious.
It is definitely a property exclusive to religion. Religion has immense power to instill core beliefs in a person. And core beliefs are the absolute center of our thinking.
Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion
#19For those curious, they're using a Dymaxion map, also known as the Fuller projection[1]. It's named for Buckminster Fuller, and the goal is to reduce skew of shape and size. Notice, for example, the sizes of Greenland and Africa as compared to their heavily-skewed sizes on the Mercator projection. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dymaxion_map
I assume they think this is a good choice, but I disagree. It's just confusing. Why add such friction to data display?
It took me a moment or two as well, but you won't get change without making change. The Mercator was historically good for navigation, but is a poor representation of the globe. You need only look at their last figure, with the more granular data, to see the level and ease of detail would be lost in Africa and Eurasia.
Re: The World's Newest Major Religion: No Religion
#20About time.
Because religion often enjoys legal protection, in my eyes proclaiming to be religious does not differ much from stating: "I am legally delusional!"
In the same vein, one can hope that eventually nations also realise that churches do not deserve tax exemptions. They are businesses, and to be more precise, they are in the protection racket business.[0] The logical difference to mafia is miniscule.[1]
0: "Say, that's a nice soul. Would be awful if something happened to it..."
1: "Say, a nice shop you have here. Would be awful if something happened to it..."